When the study, known as the Women's Health Initiative, was halted in July,
many doctors changed their message. Try to live with your symptoms, these
doctors now say. Or find other ways to deal with them. And forget about using
hormones solely to protect yourself from diseases; there are other, better ways.
It is an almost unheard of transformation of the medical landscape, said Dr.
Barbara J. Turner of the University of Pennsylvania, who studies the pace of
innovation. Doctors "turned on a dime," she said.
But it is impossible to tell how many patients turned with them, and what
happened when they did.
There is no obvious pattern of responses to the new reality. In interviews,
gynecologists and internists say some patients have stopped taking hormones,
only to resume their use when they find symptoms intolerable. Others say most
women who stop taking the pills have little or no trouble. They note that even
before the study was halted last summer, more than half of the women who started
hormone therapy stopped it on their own within a few years.
Still other doctors are devising their own methods of weaning women from the
drugs suggesting they wear estrogen patches and gradually trim them down to
nothing, or increase the interval between pills. In this, however, they are
acting on their own. There are no practice guidelines, no rigorous studies on
what works best.
Eventually, the Women's Health Initiative will have data on how its
participants fared when they were advised to stop taking their hormone pills.
For now, the only data come from drug company sales figures, which show that
many women taking Prempro, the hormone combination made by Wyeth that was tested
in the study, have stopped, their number falling to 1.5 million from 2.7
million.
But in Wyeth's loss, other companies see an opportunity. For example, sales
of Evista, made by
Eli Lilly & Company, rose by 24 percent in
September. Evista, which can actually elicit hot flashes but protects bone, has
some estrogenlike properties, but the company emphasizes that it is not a
hormone.
"There's this whole open market," said Valerie Layne, a nurse practitioner at
Hightstown Medical Associates, a private practice in New Jersey where she says
the Eli Lilly sales representative is now a frequent visitor. "They know our
alternative now is their drug," Ms. Layne said. "Even though hormone therapy may
be O.K., everyone is too afraid to continue."
The Burst Bubble
The study that caused this uproar, the Women's Health Initiative, involved
16,000 women who were randomly assigned to take either Prempro, a popular
combination of estrogens and progestin, or a placebo. The researchers halted the
study prematurely when the accumulating data indicated that even though hormone
therapy can reduce cholesterol levels, women who took Prempro had slightly more
heart attacks, strokes and blood clots. They also had slightly more breast
cancer. These risks exceeded the regimen's benefits, of slightly less colon
cancer and slightly fewer fractures.
Women who were taking Prempro were advised to stop taking the pills
immediately, and the scientists said there was no reason to believe that the
findings applied only to Prempro. Until proven otherwise, they said, women and
their doctors should assume that all hormone therapy that involved estrogen and
progestin bears the same risks.
The study did not test other hormone regimens, but many researchers say it
cannot be assumed that they are any safer.
At first, many doctors, gynecologists in particular, reacted with anger and
denial.
"We have had a real love affair with hormone therapy," said Dr. Susan L.
Hendrix, a study investigator and gynecologist at Wayne State University in
Detroit. When the study said it might not be a panacea, "it was like telling
someone they have an ugly baby."
Dr. Isaac Schiff, who is the chairman of obstetrics and gynecology at
Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, said it was his impression that many
gynecologists were upset because their own clinical experience had told them
that the drugs were a boon to women. Internists, he added, who had been
prescribing hormone therapy to prevent conditions like heart disease and
osteoporosis, tended to be more accepting of the study's findings.
Advertisement
Dr. Schiff explained: "As a gynecologist, you have a patient who comes into
your office who is troubled with hot flashes or she has severe vaginal atrophy
and she says sex is not pleasurable. You prescribe hormone therapy and she comes
back four months later and says, `Oh, doctor, I feel so much better.' An
internist does not have someone come back and say, `Thank you, doctor, my heart
feels better.' "
Yet many gynecologists, even those who say they think hormone therapy has
been demonized, say they have changed their message.
"In the old days, I used to say, `Look, there's no evidence that this is
going to hurt you,' " said Dr. Andrew Good, a gynecologist at the Cleveland
Clinic. "Now I can't say that with the same enthusiasm."
Dr. Jan L. Herr, a gynecologist at Kaiser Permanente Medical Group in San
Rafael, Calif., said the new message has meant that women have had to change
their expectations of life in their middle years. She asks women who find their
symptoms of menopause unbearable to try the lowest possible dose of hormone
therapy, which may not rid them of their symptoms.
"They have to be satisfied with feeling better, but not perfect," Dr. Herr
said. "They had always wanted to feel perfect," with no hot flashes, no night
sweats, no vaginal dryness. "They had always said, `Why should I feel like I'm
55? I want to feel like I'm 30.' " Now, she said, women have to get used to
feeling as if they are 55.
'Honey, It's the Hormones'
Iretta Taylor, a customer service adviser in Houston, said she tried to live
without hormone therapy but decided she would rather not.
Ms. Taylor, 49, explained: "I went into menopause at a very early age, at
about 40, and it was a very bad, very emotional time. I was edgy, depressed, I
thought I was having a nervous breakdown. I had hot flashes, too, and a hollow,
dry look, and dryness in the vaginal area, which was no fun.
"As soon as I started taking H.R.T., it all went away," she said, referring
to hormone therapy by its old name, H.R.T., for hormone replacement therapy. "A
co-worker told me, `Your skin looks so fine.' It did; I had a real glow.
"When I heard all the horror stories last summer I stopped," she said. "I
didn't even call my doctor; I just stopped. Right away I started to feel bad
again. I thought at first that it was psychosomatic, but then I realized,
`Honey, it's the hormones.'
"I asked my doctor, `Please put me back on H.R.T.,' and he did." Now, she
said: "I feel like a woman is supposed to feel. If they ban this in the United
States, I'll drive down to Mexico to get it. That's how much I need my H.R.T."
The question is, Are women like Ms. Taylor the exception or the rule?
"It's very clear that there is some proportion of women who did not react
well to cold turkey," said Dr. Marcia L. Stefanick of Stanford University, who
as principal investigator for the Women's Health Initiative lectures about the
study and its results. "They are very vocal. But then I ask the audience, How
many of you went cold turkey and had no problem whatsoever?" She is finding that
"the vast majority of women are doing fine."
Dr. Herr turns to data from the days when she and others urged all women to
take hormones. After two years, she said, 80 percent were not taking the drugs
they simply stopped filling their prescriptions. That tells her, she said, that
many women are not bothered by severe symptoms, or choose to live with them.
Doctors, she added, are more likely to hear from the women about their
difficulties, which can skew their perspective.
They may not see women like Elizabeth Benney, who is 69 and runs a horse farm
in Upton, Mass. She never had a hot flash, never had a night sweat, but started
taking hormones about 15 years ago to alleviate vaginal dryness and avert
osteoporosis, worried because her mother had had the disease. She feared that if
her bones thinned and she was thrown from a horse, they might fracture.
Advertisement
Last July, "when the news came out," she said, "I decided to stop." She did
so with some reluctance, worried that the vaginal dryness would return and that
her skin might age without the hormones. To her surprise, nothing happened. She
feels and looks fine no different, she says, from when she was taking the
pills. Her bone density is fine, she added, so she does not appear to be at risk
for fractures.
Doctors say some women are remaining on estrogen because they believe it
keeps their skin looking young. The studies, so far, "are not nearly as well
done as one would like," said Dr. Barbara A. Gilchrest, chairman of the
dermatology department at the Boston University School of Medicine. But, Dr.
Gilchrest said, there is credible evidence that hormone therapy can thicken skin
by increasing the amount of collagen, or prevent its loss. It is not clear when
questions about these or other possible uses of hormone therapy will be
answered. Some studies, like ones asking if the therapy protects against
Alzheimer's disease, are continuing. But given the findings so far, there is
some question of whether it would be ethical to conduct studies of cosmetic
uses. Many women, however, are already convinced.
"You wouldn't believe how many women want to stay on estrogen for their
skin," said Dr. Margaret M. Polaneczky, a gynecologist at the Iris Cantor
Women's Health Center in New York. "You could have an hourlong intellectual
discussion about all the risks and benefits of hormone replacement therapy,
about how it might be better to consider some other drugs for, say, osteoporosis
prevention, and you think you've both agreed. But just as you're getting ready
to write a prescription for Fosomax, she'll say, `Wait a minute I've changed
my mind. I think the estrogen is making my skin look younger. I'm going to stay
on it.' "
Some can wean themselves from hormones only gradually, using schemes their
doctors invented. Some doctors ask women to try doing without hormones on
weekends, gradually extending the hormone-free days into the week. Others advise
taking a pill every other day for a few weeks, then every third day, gradually
going down to no pills at all. Dr. Hendrix prescribes hormone patches and tells
women to cut them each week, snipping them down until there is nothing left.
"Is there any science to this?" Dr. Hendrix asked. "Absolutely not. We're on
a rapid learning curve."
The Alzheimer's Hypothesis
Dr. Rowan T. Chlebowski of the Harbor-U.C.L.A. Research and Education
Institute, an investigator with the Women's Health Initiative, has been spending
time talking to doctors about what the study's data mean, and how to go on from
here. His experience, he says, is a window on the lingering confusion. While the
initial message is clear that women should be asking themselves why they are
taking hormones rather than why they are not taking them it is overlaid with
all sorts of what if's.
What if a woman takes hormones for only a year or so and then stops? The
answer is, no one knows, Dr. Chlebowski said. "It is almost certain your risk
will be reduced, but then it's a question of, well, what is the risk compared to
the benefits?"
What if, doctors ask, they sit down with a woman and figure out what her
risks are? They could suggest to women at risk of breast cancer or heart disease
that they try to do without hormone therapy and advise that women at risk for
colon cancer or osteoporosis take it.
If only it were so simple, Dr. Chlebowski said. One problem, he said, is that
there is no reliable way to determine which women are at particular risk for
specific diseases, whether it is breast cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis or
colon cancer.
"There's a kind of assumption that a doctor can chat with you about your risk
Did your mother have a heart attack? and that that would have an influence
on what you're doing." The problem, he said, is that "our current methods don't
do very well" in predicting risk.
Some doctors also wonder if there might be critical periods when estrogen
might protect against heart disease, osteoporosis or Alzheimer's.
Advertisement
While there are drugs to protect against heart disease and osteoporosis,
there is nothing yet to prevent Alzheimer's. So if the window-of-opportunity
hypothesis has any urgency, it might be with that disease.
"I think it is the most compelling reason to take estrogen," said Dr. Stanley
Birge, a gerontologist at Washington University in St. Louis.
But other experts say that at this point it is simply wishful thinking to say
that estrogen therapy is protective, but only if it is started early.
Nevertheless, some women say that for now they will accept hormone therapy's
small excess risk in hopes that by starting therapy early they will gain a
potentially large benefit.
The Alzheimer's hypothesis "is a supposition," said Dr. Deborah Grady, who
directs the University of California San Francisco/Mount Zion Women's Health
Clinical Research Center.
While some laboratory and animal studies have indicated that hormone therapy
might protect brain cells, it is not clear what would be required to prevent
Alzheimer's. In some studies, like one published last week, women who were
taking hormones had less Alzheimer's disease, but in others they did not. Dr.
Grady said that in several studies, women who took estrogen actually performed
worse on cognitive tests.
But Dr. Stefanick said that until researchers completed rigorous studies
asking if estrogen can protect against Alzheimer's disease, the question will
linger.
"Alzheimer's disease is what people are going to hold onto," she said.
"Everyone is afraid of losing their memory. Until we get the answer to that one,
there will always be that last little piece."
ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND
MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS
OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR
LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND
COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH
YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.
"A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth."
-- Albert Einstein, letter to a friend, 1901
"I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education."
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William C. Jarvis, September 28, 1820
"What's the point of vaccination if it doesn't protect you from the unvaccinated?"
-- Sandy Gottstein
"Who gets to decide what the greater good is and how many will be sacrificed to it?"